Background: Cancer is the leading cause of non-accidental death amongst adolescents and young adults (AYA), aged 15-39, in the U.S. It is critical to understand end of life (EOL) care of AYA cancer decedents, including use of medically intense interventions like intubation. Although desired by some, most patients prefer a natural death. We sought to determine rates of medically intense interventions at end of life for AYA cancer decedents and associated factors. Methods: Using the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development private administrative database linked to death certificates, we performed a retrospective population based analysis of patients aged 15-39 with cancer who died between 2000-2010. We used previously defined administrative codes indicative of intense EOL care: intubation, CPR, hospital re-admission, and ICU admission in the last 30 days of life, and location of death. The frequencies of each intense item were calculated and multivariate logistic regression was used to determine clinical (including treatment at specialty center vs non) and socio-demographic factors associated with each item and receipt of ≥ 2 items. Results: The 8,978 AYA cancer decedents were 46% non-Hispanic white, 29% Hispanic, 10% non-Hispanic black, 11% Asian; 21% had hematologic malignancies, 70% had solid tumors, and 9% had secondary neoplasms; 58% were hospitalized only at non-specialty centers in the last 6 months of life. 62% received ≥ 1 medically intense EOL care intervention, and 32% received > 2. Factors associated with > 2 intense EOL care interventions were: non-Hispanic black (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.16-1.65), Hispanics (1.19, 1.06-1.35), Asians (1.30, 1.10-1.52); those sometimes (2.19, 1.87-2.56) or never (1.44, 1.26-1.65) seen at specialty centers; hematologic malignancies (1.77, 1.57-2.00 ref grp: solid tumors) whereas secondary malignancies were not associated with > 2 intense markers (0.68, 0.56-0.83). Conclusions: Nearly two-thirds of the AYA cancer decedents received medically intense EOL interventions and disparities exist in receipt of such care. Further research needs to determine if the disparities are due to healthcare system, patient preference, or other factors.